RE: How could evolution result in IC systems?

From: Ralph Krumdieck (ralphkru@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU)
Date: Mon Sep 18 2000 - 20:24:10 EDT

  • Next message: Paul Nelson: "Examples of natural selection generating CSI"

    >Nelson:
    >So I have reduced this three part system to two. Perhaps it is a two part IC
    >system? Nope, the parts are not well-matched.If the length of the silk
    >strand is reduced , you don't need to change the glue to accomade it, and if
    >you double the size of the silk strand you don't need to change the glue.
    >And of course the author forgot the fact that the spider needs to reel in
    >it's catch. Now we have an intelligent agent as an essential part of the
    >system! The spider knows, has foresight, and makes choices to direct the
    >events of this prey-capture system.

    So now we finally have an example of "intelligence" being part of the design.
    Before we slide into a spirited discussion of the mental prowess of spiders,
    Nelson did respond to me earlier (Sept 14) as follows:

    ". I'm not saying the designer
    is not a higher intelligence or God. I am just saying it is reasonable to
    say that the intelligent agent has at least human intelligence

    Clearly Nelson is not seeing spiders as the ID. So, evidently,
    Nelson, and perhaps other IDers, sees more than one
    intelligence at work. There is the Main ID, which formulated
    the design and there are lesser intelligences, which contribute
    by using their intelligences to carry out the design--for instance,
    the spider. This sounds something like Bertvan's idea that all
    life is intelligent. At least that's how I read Nelson's post.
    ralph



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 18 2000 - 20:24:12 EDT